Xmas came early.

[Dannyvandelft]

Heatblur, I'd pay full price, and then some, for this. It's the one thing I always wanted as a Tomcat flyer. Don't need carriers, or anything else. Just the plane. Now my new most anticipated module.

 

Love you guys' work!

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

 

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

Hands raised in agreement.

[Rudel_chw]

For me, honestly I’d rather get an all new aircraft like the A-6, rather than another version of an already existing aircraft.

[Spurts]

An F-14D "would be" an all new aircraft.  Real HUD, IRST, PTID in the back for high resolution TGP work, modern radar, DFCS, JDAM.  The flight mechanics would be "largely" the same but even then DFCS would smooth out the rough edges (where I like to hang out)

  

[Tank50us]

Yeah, one of my Squadron mates lives in the land of "No unclassed data, no real module" rules. I live on the idea that HBs team are quite intelligent, and can figure these things out without the documentation. The only thing the documentation serves at that point is to prove that yes, the work they did is accurate to the real aircraft. And frankly, given the options, the latter seems like the 80% solution to the issue of getting an F-14D into DCS.

For those that don't know what I mean: 80% Solution means that it's good enough for 80+ of the playerbase, with only <20% of the players being able to know the real differences (and most of them couldn't talk about it anyway)

[Spurts]

For my part, I don't expect the F-14D to come to fruition unless they get that PTID and Sparrowhawk data.  They might use the Typhoon experience to fudge the IRST but they have flat out said that unless they know how the data was processed for PTID/SPHK they won't do F-14D

 

[Steel Jaw]

Turkeys can’t fly…runs away.

[WinterH]

Eh... all the Phantoms and A-6 first, pretty please, and if it was up to me a Draken too.

[Rudel_chw]

2 hours ago, Spurts said:

An F-14D "would be" an all new aircraft.

 

Well, we obviously have different meanings for the "all-new" term  

[jaguara5]

null

[Spurts]

lol, that's what I figured.

[Dannyvandelft]

I'll take it. Not yet is not a never. As long as they're gathering info, and the possibility is there, I'm happy.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

I am going to keep myself fit for "flying" long enough for the Super Turkey to arrive. 

[LanceCriminal86]

All it means is that if any requests for docs ever come through, that are actually releasable to HB for use in a simulation, then they'd look towards what they could do. If you were to mind map out all the systems, displays, tests, MFD views, and all the progressive updates to the D from when they were delivered through 2006 there's a huge amount that would have to be covered. Doing a 1992 F-14D and a 2005 F-14D is a pretty big canyon of differences potentially.

[Tank50us]

23 hours ago, LanceCriminal86 said:

Doing a 1992 F-14D and a 2005 F-14D is a pretty big canyon of differences potentially.

I thought the F-14D came into service in 1996?

Also, as I've said before, the issues stated aren't something I consider to be insurmountable, but the one thing that is going to be tricky is doing any of this, and selling it to the player base without having the rivet counters breaking out the loud speakers. Sure, they could create an IRST that's passable, based on how we know the things work, but certain people will demand the documents on how the Super Tomcats IRST works, and that the version in game works exactly like the one in the real world. I don't know about the rest of the player base, but with exception to the Warbirds, we'll never get a 100% faithful aircraft in DCS. The reasons are as follows:

1. many of the modules are purposely made into hodge-podges in order to represent the aircraft through multiple time periods both in terms of systems and weapons
2. Due to the nature of some aircraft, and the documents that support them, some information simply can't be acquired. For example the documents surrounding the nuclear weapons release equipment in the F-111 or F-105)
3. Gameplay. As much as certain people would love each plane to be 100% accurate, and all of the procedures accurate to real life... you can't get too far into the sim aspect that it becomes a dull game to play. Seriously, as someone who's hooked out ground-air, it takes a bit longer than the 5 seconds it does in DCS to get an air-start cart hooked up, running, and up to the right pressure to start the engines. Granted my experience with the things involve the CRJ family, but still. Also most aircraft aren't rearmed in 30 seconds, some can take up to 30 minutes to fully rearmed. If this was 100% accurate to the real world, things would just be absolutely boring, and many of those who play today probably wouldn't have gotten interested. Ergo, concessions have to be made for gameplay. (like the upcoming F-15Es keybinds for the back seat from the front).

[Lurker]

On 12/5/2022 at 6:18 PM, Rudel_chw said:

For me, honestly I’d rather get an all new aircraft like the A-6, rather than another version of an already existing aircraft.

 

This. Especially when you take into consideration that anything that the D can do, a B can do just as well, if they have a well trained and coordinated crew. Yeah, the D is probably nice and easy with its digital FCS systems, and it's glass cockpit and HUDs and radar upgrades and whatnot, but the actual capability of the B is already there, it just takes more skill to use properly. 

Edited December 7, 2022 by Lurker

[Spurts]

4 hours ago, Lurker said:

 

This. Especially when you take into consideration that anything that the D can do, a B can do just as well, if they have a well trained and coordinated crew. Yeah, the D is probably nice and easy with its digital FCS systems, and it's glass cockpit and HUDs and radar upgrades and whatnot, but the actual capability of the B is already there, it just takes more skill to use properly. 

 

not even close.  The APG-71 outranges the AWG-9 and is less sensitive to notching, the AN/AAS-42 has no analog in the F-14B, The PTID gives a clearer LANTIRN image than the TID, and the D has a Digital Databus for JDAM that the B doesn't have.  So no, it isn't a case of "If you work harder you can make the B do everything the D can."  Then there are the unknown unknowns of what the PTID can do that the TID can't.

It's a mute argument to make "I want the other HB titles first" because you are going to get them.  If they got every piece of documentation they needed TODAY and pulled the entire F-14A/B team off to work it they F-4 and A-6 would still be done first.

[Lurker]

47 minutes ago, Spurts said:

not even close.  The APG-71 outranges the AWG-9 and is less sensitive to notching, the AN/AAS-42 has no analog in the F-14B, The PTID gives a clearer LANTIRN image than the TID, and the D has a Digital Databus for JDAM that the B doesn't have.  So no, it isn't a case of "If you work harder you can make the B do everything the D can."  Then there are the unknown unknowns of what the PTID can do that the TID can't.

 

Ok you get JDAMs. Ill grant you that. But the rest? Can you show me documentation where the APG-71 makes the AWG-9 less sensitive to notching? Pilot testimony? Anything? Also, even if it's true the DCSisms in the game will not make it work any better than it does. It's still an upgrade to a really old 60s radar. I mean you still have to guide the same missiles to target and those missiles still have the same limitations as before. Sure the PTID has a clearer image, yay for crappy pilot vision? 

Seriously there is very little that the D can do better than the B, I mean I know why people want it it's because they want to be "better" but better doesn't automatically mean more capable. 

 

[Spurts]

41 minutes ago, Lurker said:

Seriously there is very little that the D can do better than the B, I mean I know why people want it it's because they want to be "better" but better doesn't automatically mean more capable. 

 

Many people want the best version of every plane available, and yes it is more capable.  The DFCS alone lowers the required skill floor for pilots so the F-14 will become more accessible to some people, same with the Sparrowhawk HUD.  There is a reason pilots who only flew the D were called "D Babies" and "HUD Cripples" because it made so many aspects of combat so much easier.  The guys who never flew the D speak very much like you do, "you don't need all that."  If you are happy with the A/B, great, that's awesome for you, I am too.  Some people aren't and want a more modern plane, including many friends of mine.  Who are you to poo-poo their wants?

[LanceCriminal86]

20 hours ago, Tank50us said:

I thought the F-14D came into service in 1996?

Also, as I've said before, the issues stated aren't something I consider to be insurmountable, but the one thing that is going to be tricky is doing any of this, and selling it to the player base without having the rivet counters breaking out the loud speakers. Sure, they could create an IRST that's passable, based on how we know the things work, but certain people will demand the documents on how the Super Tomcats IRST works, and that the version in game works exactly like the one in the real world. I don't know about the rest of the player base, but with exception to the Warbirds, we'll never get a 100% faithful aircraft in DCS. The reasons are as follows:

1. many of the modules are purposely made into hodge-podges in order to represent the aircraft through multiple time periods both in terms of systems and weapons
2. Due to the nature of some aircraft, and the documents that support them, some information simply can't be acquired. For example the documents surrounding the nuclear weapons release equipment in the F-111 or F-105)
3. Gameplay. As much as certain people would love each plane to be 100% accurate, and all of the procedures accurate to real life... you can't get too far into the sim aspect that it becomes a dull game to play. Seriously, as someone who's hooked out ground-air, it takes a bit longer than the 5 seconds it does in DCS to get an air-start cart hooked up, running, and up to the right pressure to start the engines. Granted my experience with the things involve the CRJ family, but still. Also most aircraft aren't rearmed in 30 seconds, some can take up to 30 minutes to fully rearmed. If this was 100% accurate to the real world, things would just be absolutely boring, and many of those who play today probably wouldn't have gotten interested. Ergo, concessions have to be made for gameplay. (like the upcoming F-15Es keybinds for the back seat from the front).

VF-11 and VF-31 transitioned to F-14Ds in 1992, with only a few others doing so later like VF-2 and VF-213 after their sister squadrons shut down, and 11 eventually going to Bs in the late 90s.

DCS is supposed to be a "rivet counter" type sim to at least some degree, but more importantly Heatblur themselves have stated they don't want to half-bake any version or component/system. They said the same with all of the PTID questions, because little exists mapping out and showing all of the different displays and pages for the systems that were integrated, or the different piggy-back systems eventually added later for JDAMs and GPS.

And yes, Bs got JDAM too. Part of the B upgrades included a digital BUS, iirc it was the As that needed a digital to analog converter for LANTIRN. VF-11 and VF-143 did the operational testing and 11 deployed with them in 2002, performing the first combat JDAM drops from a Tomcat. The guy that wrote up the F-14 JDAM article/story/whitepaper deployed with VF-11 on that cruise as he was the program officer on it. But JDAM required additional piggyback equipment to work.

DFCS also didn't come until later, and was rolled out to all operational Tomcats at that time whether A, B, or D. The D didn't have DFCS from the start. DFCS testing was in 1995 with rollout to fleet As starting around 1998. Adding DFCS alone would be quite an undertaking in DCS, having to model how it interceded and did control coordination or spin recovery, we'd need details on all of that whether A, B or D.

F-14Ds didn't get PTIDs until the As and Bs started decomissioning, and the PTIDs were moved across as the D's TID was digital and newer. After VF-103's testing and cruise with LANTIRN in '96 VF-154, 211, 41, and 14 received LANTIRN as well, with there being transitions from 96-99 of some jets having LANTIRN but not the PTID yet.

The D also had a different jamming suite, altered external model features that would need to be done, cockpit remodeling, pilot would need changes to some of the equipment as the D had OBOGS and used different regulators. There's a lot to even just an old D, and Heatblur still don't want to cut corners. Docs have to not only be available but releasable/usable by HB without someone going to the Fed for breaching ITAR and espionage charges.

Also, PTID had been a separate project due to old TIDs burning out and wasn't originally linked with LANTIRN, it just happened to enhance the capability. That's part of why As got them initially as their TIDs were the oldest and needed replacing the most from what I've seen.

Edited December 7, 2022 by LanceCriminal86

[Naquaii]

7 hours ago, Lurker said:

Ok you get JDAMs. Ill grant you that. But the rest? Can you show me documentation where the APG-71 makes the AWG-9 less sensitive to notching? Pilot testimony? Anything? Also, even if it's true the DCSisms in the game will not make it work any better than it does. It's still an upgrade to a really old 60s radar. I mean you still have to guide the same missiles to target and those missiles still have the same limitations as before. Sure the PTID has a clearer image, yay for crappy pilot vision? 

Seriously there is very little that the D can do better than the B, I mean I know why people want it it's because they want to be "better" but better doesn't automatically mean more capable. 

 

There is very little the -D can’t do better than a -B apart from pure airframe and engine limitations. The AN/APG-71 wasn’t an upgrade for the AN/AWG-9, it was a completely new radar. Basically everything in it outclassed the AWG-9, including doppler filters.

The only valid way of saying it upgraded the AWG-9 would be because it replaced the radar part of it as the AWG-9 was more than the radar. But it was more or less a completely new radar.

Edited December 7, 2022 by Naquaii

[Lurker]

Thanks for the reply Naquaii, my focus was on the DCSisms and game limitations, which is why I assume the rest of the thread was deleted by the mods. So I will not bother to respond directly. Let's just leave it at that, and not irk the wrath of the moderators any more. 

*edit*

Well apparently part of the forum got deleted. Welp! Moderators not to blame, for once! Just joking. 

Edited December 8, 2022 by Lurker

[Dragon1-1]

I guess one day they'd declassify the D, hopefully Iran will soon get a new, maybe more West-friendly regime and we can get all the D model Tomcat goodies.  I'm not that big on the D, but it's a Tomcat, so I'll probably be flying it when it comes out.